Teacher(s)
Language
French
Main themes
This course is composed of two distinct parts: the course of Criticism of Information Sources (Q1) and the Human Sciences Seminar (Q1 and Q2). Both aim to enable students to acquire the methodological fundamentals of academic work in the human sciences: research approaches, critical analysis, synthesis and writing skills, and scientific ethics.
In the age of social networks, fake news, and artificial intelligence, it is more necessary than ever to be cautious and take a step back from the information presented to us on the Internet and in the media. The skills acquired by students through this course are therefore essential for future lawyers and enlightened citizens.
Learning outcomes
At the end of this learning unit, the student is able to : | |
The general objective of this teaching unit is to train in critical thinking and the acquisition of methods of academic work.
I. Training in the scientific approach - Integrate the main basic research approaches and tools in the human sciences; - Acquire the foundations of the critical method and research ethics, allowing access to scientific knowledge; in particular, to acquire the ability to synthesize and confront different sources as well as the ability to account for them in a structured way (using a logical, clear, and well-balanced plan);
- Implement approaches, methods, and ethics in the context of practical exercises and seminar work;
- Acquire the ability to read and understand scientific articles, regardless of the discipline of the humanities concerned.
II. Concerning the acquisition of a general culture and interdisciplinary knowledge - Acquire critical knowledge of general sources of information (such as the press, new media, and the Internet in general, political speeches, polls, statistics, etc.); - Acquire a critical approach to a topic within a human sciences discipline (such as philosophy, sociology, psychology, criminology, or history, etc.), thanks to the seminar.
III. Written and oral communication, in French - Acquire the ability to communicate, in writing and orally, an idea and/or reasoning, especially in the context of the seminar. |
|
Content
1. The Criticism of Information Sources course is primarily a methods-oriented course, focused on practical implementation through exercises.
The presentation of the principles and methods of research involves the theoretical definition of a certain number of theoretical concepts (the categories of information sources, the methods of documentary research, the construction of a research question, the principles of criticism of information sources, and the legal foundations of information validity). However, this presentation is systematically illustrated in a practical, even participatory way.
2. The Human Sciences Seminar aims to introduce students to interdisciplinarity and to encourage them to problematize a research topic in disciplines other than law. The theme addressed in the seminar varies from year to year, but the framework remains the same: theoretical sessions based on the analysis of scientific articles, familiarizing students with the formulation of research questions, documentary research, and scientific writing skills.
The presentation of the principles and methods of research involves the theoretical definition of a certain number of theoretical concepts (the categories of information sources, the methods of documentary research, the construction of a research question, the principles of criticism of information sources, and the legal foundations of information validity). However, this presentation is systematically illustrated in a practical, even participatory way.
2. The Human Sciences Seminar aims to introduce students to interdisciplinarity and to encourage them to problematize a research topic in disciplines other than law. The theme addressed in the seminar varies from year to year, but the framework remains the same: theoretical sessions based on the analysis of scientific articles, familiarizing students with the formulation of research questions, documentary research, and scientific writing skills.
Teaching methods
The teaching unit consists of two learning activities: the Critique of Information Sources (CSI) and the Human Sciences Seminar (SSH).
The CSI course is given ex cathedra during the first term, at a frequency of 2 hours every two weeks.
The seminar takes place for 1.5–2 hours every two weeks, across both the first and second semesters. Attendance at the sessions is strongly recommended due to the practical and participatory exercises proposed.
In the first semester, 5–6 theoretical sessions teach students the fundamentals of research in the human sciences: research object construction, documentary research, sources criticism and synthesis, scientific writing, critical apparatus, etc. The theory is based on the reading of various scientific articles related to the seminar theme; It is strongly recommended to prepare each of the readings before each session
In the second semester, students are invited to present their research problem orally in small group discussions. These exchanges, designed as real seminars (interactive, analytical, and collaborative), enable a significant change in students' thinking and working methods.
The CSI course is given ex cathedra during the first term, at a frequency of 2 hours every two weeks.
The seminar takes place for 1.5–2 hours every two weeks, across both the first and second semesters. Attendance at the sessions is strongly recommended due to the practical and participatory exercises proposed.
In the first semester, 5–6 theoretical sessions teach students the fundamentals of research in the human sciences: research object construction, documentary research, sources criticism and synthesis, scientific writing, critical apparatus, etc. The theory is based on the reading of various scientific articles related to the seminar theme; It is strongly recommended to prepare each of the readings before each session
In the second semester, students are invited to present their research problem orally in small group discussions. These exchanges, designed as real seminars (interactive, analytical, and collaborative), enable a significant change in students' thinking and working methods.
Evaluation methods
Type of assessment (and possible arrangements)
The course of Criticism of Information Sources is evaluated by a written exam, organized during the January session, or a final exam organized during the June and September sessions. Only a mark higher than 10/20 is retained for the subsequent session(s) of the same academic year (Art. 23 of the RGEE Implementing Provisions for the Faculty of Law).
The Human Sciences Seminar is evaluated in different stages:
- the writing of a contextualized research problem and an annotated bibliography at the end of the first semester – 25%
- the writing of a 10-page scientific summary and its oral defence at the end of the second semester – 75%
All three steps must be completed by students for the first session evaluation.
In the event of a delay in the submission of an assignment (preparatory or final), 2 points out of 20 are withdrawn per day of delay, with a maximum of 5 days late. Beyond this, the student receives a final grade of 0A/20 for the June session.
Exemption from resubmitting the final seminar work in the same academic year is granted from 10/20 for the final seminar mark (Art. 23 of the Implementing Provisions of the RGEE for the Faculty of Law).
In the second session, the scientific synthesis alone is evaluated at 100%.
The two learning activities result in a single final score at the end of the June and September sessions, corresponding to the average score of the two assessments. However, the two learning activities must be completed to be eligible for this average score.
Language of the evaluation:
French
Evaluation criteria:
The evaluation grid for the work is communicated to the students.
Other details:
The use of generative artificial intelligence is prohibited when it contradicts the learning of this teaching unit, namely: problematizing a subject, conducting documentary research, and producing a reasoned synthesis. However, AI tools can be used to improve writing quality (spelling correction, synonym search, etc.). Any such use must be indicated in a footnote as follows: specifying the AI model used, its web address, and the date of use.
The course of Criticism of Information Sources is evaluated by a written exam, organized during the January session, or a final exam organized during the June and September sessions. Only a mark higher than 10/20 is retained for the subsequent session(s) of the same academic year (Art. 23 of the RGEE Implementing Provisions for the Faculty of Law).
The Human Sciences Seminar is evaluated in different stages:
- the writing of a contextualized research problem and an annotated bibliography at the end of the first semester – 25%
- the writing of a 10-page scientific summary and its oral defence at the end of the second semester – 75%
All three steps must be completed by students for the first session evaluation.
In the event of a delay in the submission of an assignment (preparatory or final), 2 points out of 20 are withdrawn per day of delay, with a maximum of 5 days late. Beyond this, the student receives a final grade of 0A/20 for the June session.
Exemption from resubmitting the final seminar work in the same academic year is granted from 10/20 for the final seminar mark (Art. 23 of the Implementing Provisions of the RGEE for the Faculty of Law).
In the second session, the scientific synthesis alone is evaluated at 100%.
The two learning activities result in a single final score at the end of the June and September sessions, corresponding to the average score of the two assessments. However, the two learning activities must be completed to be eligible for this average score.
Language of the evaluation:
French
Evaluation criteria:
The evaluation grid for the work is communicated to the students.
Other details:
The use of generative artificial intelligence is prohibited when it contradicts the learning of this teaching unit, namely: problematizing a subject, conducting documentary research, and producing a reasoned synthesis. However, AI tools can be used to improve writing quality (spelling correction, synonym search, etc.). Any such use must be indicated in a footnote as follows: specifying the AI model used, its web address, and the date of use.
Other information
For the seminar, the bibliographic referencing is in principle written according to the rules laid down in the following citation guide:
BERNARD, N. (dir), BORN, R., de JONGHE, D., de TERWAGNE, C., MOREAU, P., SLINGENEYER, T., TRUFFIN, B., VAN MEERBEECK, J. et VANVREKOM, S., Guide des citations, références et abréviations juridiques, 6e éd., Waterloo, Wolters Kluwer, 2017.
BERNARD, N. (dir), BORN, R., de JONGHE, D., de TERWAGNE, C., MOREAU, P., SLINGENEYER, T., TRUFFIN, B., VAN MEERBEECK, J. et VANVREKOM, S., Guide des citations, références et abréviations juridiques, 6e éd., Waterloo, Wolters Kluwer, 2017.
Online resources
The PowerPoint presentations and all the documentary resources worked on are made available to students via Moodle.
Bibliography
BAUTHIAN, I. et GALLY, L’esprit critique, Paris, Editions Delcourt, 2021.
BRONNER, G., La démocratie des crédules, Paris, PUF, 2013.
BRONNER, G., Déchéance de rationalité, Paris, Grasset, 2019.
CUYKENS, S., HOLZAPFEL, D. et KENNES, L., La preuve en matière pénale, Bruxelles, Larcier, 2015.
B. FOSSÉPREZ, B. et PÜTZ, A. (dir.), La preuve au carrefour de cinq disciplines juridiques, Limal, Anthemis, 2013.
GAUVARD, C. et SIRINELLI, J.-F. (dir.), Dictionnaire de l’historien, Paris, PUF, 2015.
HILLIS, K., PETIT, M., JARRETT, K., Google and the culture of search, New York, Routledge, 2012.
MARQUIS, N., LENEL, E. et VAN CAMPENHOUDT, L., Pratique de la lecture critique en sciences humaines et sociales, Paris, Dunod, 2018.
MOUGENOT, D., La preuve¸ Bruxelles, Larcier, 2012 (Tiré à part du Répertoire notarial).
PYCKE, J., La critique historique : un long chemin à parcourir entre le témoignage et la synthèse, 3e éd., Louvain-la-Neuve, Academia-Bruylant, 2000.
QUIVY, R. et VAN CAMPENHOUDT, L., Manuel de recherches en sciences sociales, 3e éd. rev. et augm., Paris, Dunod, 2006.
ROMAINVILLE, M., À l’école du doute : apprendre à penser juste en découvrant pourquoi l’on pense faux, Paris, PUF, 2023.
SAMARAN, C. (dir.), L’Histoire et ses méthodes, Paris, La Pléiade, 1961 (Encyclopédie de La Pléiade).
SCHEEPERS, C. (dir.), Former à l’écrit, former par l’écrit dans le supérieur, Bruxelles, De
Boeck Supérieur, 2021.
SCHEEPERS, C. (dir.), Former à l’oral, former par l’oral dans le supérieur, Bruxelles, De
Boeck Supérieur, 2023.
SCHEEPERS, C. (dir.), Former à la lecture, former par la lecture dans le supérieur, Bruxelles, De
Boeck Supérieur, 2024.
SUNSTEIN, C.R., Anatomie de la rumeur, Genève, Ed. Markus Haller, 2012.
TIHON, A., Critique historique, Bruxelles, syllabus des FUSL, 1987 (inédit).
BRONNER, G., La démocratie des crédules, Paris, PUF, 2013.
BRONNER, G., Déchéance de rationalité, Paris, Grasset, 2019.
CUYKENS, S., HOLZAPFEL, D. et KENNES, L., La preuve en matière pénale, Bruxelles, Larcier, 2015.
B. FOSSÉPREZ, B. et PÜTZ, A. (dir.), La preuve au carrefour de cinq disciplines juridiques, Limal, Anthemis, 2013.
GAUVARD, C. et SIRINELLI, J.-F. (dir.), Dictionnaire de l’historien, Paris, PUF, 2015.
HILLIS, K., PETIT, M., JARRETT, K., Google and the culture of search, New York, Routledge, 2012.
MARQUIS, N., LENEL, E. et VAN CAMPENHOUDT, L., Pratique de la lecture critique en sciences humaines et sociales, Paris, Dunod, 2018.
MOUGENOT, D., La preuve¸ Bruxelles, Larcier, 2012 (Tiré à part du Répertoire notarial).
PYCKE, J., La critique historique : un long chemin à parcourir entre le témoignage et la synthèse, 3e éd., Louvain-la-Neuve, Academia-Bruylant, 2000.
QUIVY, R. et VAN CAMPENHOUDT, L., Manuel de recherches en sciences sociales, 3e éd. rev. et augm., Paris, Dunod, 2006.
ROMAINVILLE, M., À l’école du doute : apprendre à penser juste en découvrant pourquoi l’on pense faux, Paris, PUF, 2023.
SAMARAN, C. (dir.), L’Histoire et ses méthodes, Paris, La Pléiade, 1961 (Encyclopédie de La Pléiade).
SCHEEPERS, C. (dir.), Former à l’écrit, former par l’écrit dans le supérieur, Bruxelles, De
Boeck Supérieur, 2021.
SCHEEPERS, C. (dir.), Former à l’oral, former par l’oral dans le supérieur, Bruxelles, De
Boeck Supérieur, 2023.
SCHEEPERS, C. (dir.), Former à la lecture, former par la lecture dans le supérieur, Bruxelles, De
Boeck Supérieur, 2024.
SUNSTEIN, C.R., Anatomie de la rumeur, Genève, Ed. Markus Haller, 2012.
TIHON, A., Critique historique, Bruxelles, syllabus des FUSL, 1987 (inédit).
Faculty or entity
Programmes / formations proposant cette unité d'enseignement (UE)
Title of the programme
Sigle
Credits
Prerequisites
Learning outcomes
Bachelor in Law (shift schedule)
